Trump hush money sentencing delayed due to immunity decision
NEW YORK: A New York judge on Tuesday (Jul 2) delayed Donald Trump's sentencing for his conviction on criminal charges stemming from hush money paid to a porn star until Sep 18, after the former USÂ president asked for a chance to argue he should have been immune from prosecution.
The sentencing had previously been set for Jul 11, just days before the Republican National Convention begins in Milwaukee on Jul 15.
The new timeline means Trump will likely have been nominated by his party to challenge Democratic President Joe Biden by the time he is sentenced. Justice Juan Merchan will now decide Trump's punishment, including whether to jail him, in the thick of the general election campaign ahead of the Nov 5 election.
Trump faces an uphill battle getting the hush money conviction overturned, since much of the conduct at issue in the case predated his time in office.
Trump's lawyers on Monday asked Merchan to allow them to argue his conviction in New York state court in Manhattan should be overturned due to the US Supreme Court's ruling this week that presidents are entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts.
Prosecutors with Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office said earlier on Tuesday that Trump's argument was "without merit", but agreed to delay the sentencing to give Trump the chance to make his case.
In a written ruling, Merchan said he would rule on Trump's request by Sep 6, with sentencing to follow less than two weeks later should the judge decide to uphold the conviction. Trump's lawyers must submit their arguments by Jul 10, and prosecutors face a Jul 24 deadline to respond.
Prosecutors said the payment was part of an illicit scheme to influence the election.
Trump denies having had sex with Daniels and has vowed to appeal the conviction after his sentencing.
"A PURELY PERSONAL ITEM"
In their letter to Merchan, defence lawyers argued that prosecutors had presented evidence involving Trump's official acts as president, including social media posts he made and conversations he had while in the White House.
Under the Supreme Court's ruling, prosecutors cannot use evidence related to official actions to help prove criminal cases involving unofficial actions.
"This official-acts evidence should never have been put before the jury," lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove wrote.
"Hush money paid to an adult film star is not related to a president's official acts," Hellerstein wrote.
Trump's lawyers appealed Hellerstein's decision but later abandoned the effort.
